I knew I was just asking for it by writing that essay.

I'll never escape the constant criticism every time I say something wrong!!! AAAAAA!!!

Lol j/k of course, but the thought has crossed my mind.

That's something that may have use in a beginners (non mathematical) logic class. In debates, your reasoning really doesn't matter as much as your assumptions, assertions, conclusions, etc. Statements are the thing that should matter, not the argument itself. At least that's what I think.
Point taken.

The essence of my thoughts there is simply that, although you are correct in saying that logical continuity and validity is not the sum-total of debate, it generally tends toward better debate.

That's aaaalllll I'm saying. Simply pointing out that there is a balance.

You don't have to be a validity-Nazi, but you shouldn't ignore the notion of validity either.

OK? OK.

You will indeed be hard pressed to actually show that fallacious arguments lead to false conclusions more than non fallacious arguments.
Possibly.

However, if you take a gander at the average online debate forum...

By the way, be VERY careful of advocating the elimination of invalid arguments.
Fish.

Oh... right.

At any rate, I'm not saying that they should be eradicated any more than you are saying that they should be the only means of discussion. I'm just suggesting that you might not want to intentionally employ them on a regular basis to make your point.

Logically, you can't disprove a claim that fallacies are essential to starting good arguments by posting an imaginary anecdote where a fallacy leads to a bad argument.
Simply providing a counterexample to demonstrate what I have mentioned above: that balance is important.